122 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



Christendom have been confused and consid- 

 ered inseparable. 



A clear distinction can be drawn, how- 

 ever, between Christian religion and Chris- 

 tian ethics. The Christian religion is the 

 system of beliefs and worship drawn from 

 the life and teachings of Christ. Christian 

 ethics is the system of principles of human 

 conduct drawn from the same source. By 

 far the larger portion of Christ's teachings 

 is devoted to telling men how to live and 

 act, comparatively little devoted to telling 

 them how to worship or what to believe. 

 Whatever else he was, he was certainly a 

 great teacher of morals. 



The motive which Christ sets before men 

 is, however, religious viz., the hope of re- 

 ward in the hereafter. But those principles 

 of conduct which he enunciated, inculcating 

 the spirit of forgiveness, humility, unselfish- 

 ness, brotherly kindness, purity, charity, 

 and chastity, together with his affirmative 

 golden rule, if practiced, would make a 

 paradise of earth, whether or not any re- 

 gard was given to a hereafter. What we 

 need in our schools is the direct instruction 

 in such principles and their application to 

 human conduct, and it matters not a whit 

 whether we call them Christian, scientific, 

 or pagan ethics. 



If a scientist were to formulate a code 

 of scientific ethics, and a Christian were to 

 formulate a Christian code, the two codes 

 would be strikingly alike. If the Chris- 

 tian were faithful to Scripture, however, he 

 would have at least one point, which is em- 

 bodied in one of the most fundamental of 

 Christ's precepts concerning duty, that the 

 scientist would not have, viz., "Resist not evil, 

 but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right 

 cheek turn to hi in the other also. " If this had 

 ever been tested in actual practice, it might 

 belong to the scientist's code; but because 

 of its severity as a rule of action theologists 

 have spent much mental energy in explain- 

 ing it away, and have so far succeeded that in 

 its literal sense it is not generally considered 

 as a part of Christian ethics at any rate, no 

 Christians practice it, unless perhaps Mr. 



Tolstoi. With this rule of action eliminated 

 there is no important ethical principle which 

 can form a ground of controversy between 

 scientists and Christians. We assume that 

 on ethical questions there is no material 

 difference between Protestants and Catho- 

 lics. 



Since, then, the ethical codes of earnest 

 scientific thinkers, of the Protestant, and of 

 the Catholic Churches are substantially one, 

 and since there is no hope that the state 

 will ever teach religion in its schools, may 

 we not hope that upon this ground as a 

 basis of compromise something may be ac- 

 complished through the schools of vastly 

 greater value to humanity than any degree 

 of manual training or purely intellectual de- 

 velopment ? The large thoughtlessly indif- 

 ferent class would certainly not object to 

 such an innovation. Those who are opposed 

 to religious instruction would not be losing 

 their case, because ethics is not religion. 

 All who desire religious instruction to be 

 given would be gaining their object in part, 

 inasmuch as they include ethics in religion. 

 Why not, then, show a spirit of compromise, 

 and, instead of fighting on hopeless lines 

 with divided forces, unite on a platform on 

 which all can stand and fight on lines where 

 there is hope ? 



The Church is doing a magnificent work 

 toward the correction of the monstrous evils 

 that walk rampant, but it will do vastly more 

 when it comes to place a higher estimate upon 

 human character than it does upon creeds. 

 A portion of the press is doing a grand 

 work, but it will do tenfold more when the 

 entire press comes to care more for culti- 

 vating public taste than it does for catering 

 to it. But the schools, which cultivate the 

 fields where richest and most abundant 

 harvests might be reaped, are reaping ex- 

 ceedingly light and scanty harvests, simply 

 because it is not their legal or professed 

 business to do anything toward correcting 

 existing evils or the formation of right char- 



acter. 



B. C. Mathews. 



86 Kearney Street, Newark, N. 

 February 20, 1891. 



EDITOR'S TABLE. 



THE YOUNGEST OF THE SCIENCES. 



TO know is to be able, to Teen is to 

 can: philology proclaims it, and 

 experience confirms it. Centuries ago 

 the commoner phenomena of electricity 

 and magnetism had attracted attention, 

 but no one suspected that they meant any- 

 thing in particular, or that they afforded 

 indications of a power everywhere pres- 

 ent, and only waiting a summons to en- 



ter into the service of man. Yet, let us 

 not too severely blame our ancestors for 

 lack of attention or intelligence. The 

 doors of knowledge have had to be 

 opened one by one, and in early times, 

 when so many doors still remained 

 closed, and others were at best but 

 slightly ajar, it is not to be wondered 

 at that the somewhat recondite and elu- 

 sive laws of electricity should have re- 



